Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 1001 posts

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#21

Post by atonse »

commandlinefan wrote: post #20

I’m old enough to remember when Howard Stern, as quaint as that seems today, was considered one of the greatest threats to civilization and had to be “de-platformed” before he could successfully destroy society - and the reasoning they used against him was _exactly_ the same as this reasoning: “he, himself (8chan, itself) is not going out and doing horrible things, but he’s encouraging people to go out and do horribl…

Oh yea? Howard Stern was encouraging mass murder? Something that isn't, nor has EVER been protected speech?

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#23

Post by not_a_cop75 »

nilkn wrote: post #4

I've generally been on the free speech side of this debate, as some of my previous comments on HN will show. With 8chan, I legitimately don't know what my opinion is. I've read it before, and I spent a few hours reading it this weekend, and it's beyond clear to me that it absolutely had the potential to radicalize shooters and terrorists. I'm not referring to the simple use of racial or ethnic slurs -- of course this…

You could simply say that threat actors that are allowed to post in the open are much more accessible and predictable than ones who do not.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#24

Post by yters »

RandomTisk wrote: post #19
yters wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't go away, but censorship will probably reduce the incidence to violence.

All that does is ensure racists and violent people only get to speak in echo chambers.

Then at least they isolate themselves, and have less ability to radicalize anyone besides the true believers. A number of isolated extremist cells are probably also easier to deal with for law enforcement, and these weird beliefs will stand out more to others in a social setting if they become rare.

Also, it seems like the group egging them on motivates these shooters. Tragically seems related to internet likes. So, by deflating the social network surrounding these ideas, there will be less social motivation to carry out such horrible actions.

And, finally, people have a social concept of truth, and if such ideas are considered to only be fringe crazy ideas instead of consistent with mainstream Darwinian theory, then people will be less likely to believe such ideas are true and less likely to act on them. As it is, social Darwinism seems to be one of those unpleasant truths due to the social weight given to the idea. Such social weight needs to be eradicated.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#25

Post by Sonnol53 »

yters wrote: post #18

A lot of these mass shooters (and a number of serial killers) quote social Darwinism nonsense as inspiration. I wonder why that ideological portion is not being dealt with more. I hear social Darwinism ideas fairly frequently in everyday conversations with people, like casual lunch conversations.

So what makes them think that they are superior to others and it tips them in conducting mass shootings?

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#28

Post by RandomTisk »

jredwards wrote: post #16
RandomTisk wrote: post #8

I'm still waiting for a new platform to take the world by storm: The freedom of Gab, with sane content filtering options to make it look as tame as reddit so by default users don't see all the fringe crap, but lets them if they really want, right to the legal edge.

People are not fringe will tend to abandon sites that embrace people who are, even tacitly. Sites that create havens for them will naturally tend to become sites that consist almost solely of them.

That's been the status quo up until now, but it doesn't have to be. We're moving towards orwellian style censorship at a breakneck pace with SV leading the charge.

Any violent thug can go spread their message in the town streets as long as they're not causing a disturbance. It doesn't happen very much, because it requires effort and it's sure to attract opposition. That opposition is necessary, like anti-bodies attacking an invading bacteria. By shutting out the harmful bacteria where anti-bodies can't reach them, they'll do nothing but grow and fester.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#29

Post by vorpalhex »

danharaj wrote: post #15

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the deaths of others your right to say it." How many free speech absolutists have "skin in the game", or whatever? Every alternative to censorship suggested always puts the burden on the victimized. Like, "if you debate it in public you will defeat these bad ideas". Few who are free speech absolutists roll up their sleeves and volunteer to take the action they presc…

It's not that speech doesn't have consequences. If speech had no consequences, it wouldn't be worth defending. Rather, it's that no man is fit to play the censor - not the Government which would censor political criticism of itself, not a king who would censor his opponents, nor even a billionaire who would censor the media when it spurns him.

At the same time, if someone points a finger at you and shouts "I'm going to kill you", then we're getting outside of speech and into actions, and certainly actions can be prohibited. The question we have, really, is whether the content of 8chan was just speech (and therefore should be protected unless you buy into censorship) or crosses into actions (convincing someone to massacre immigrants). From what I've seen, 8chan certainly seems to be in the action category.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#30

Post by Alex3917 »

IMHO this reflects poorly on CloudFlare.

The supreme court has ruled time and time again that the right to free speech implies the right to be heard.

While CloudFlare obviously isn't legally required to serve 8chan, the only service they are really providing is making it so that 8chan can't be DDOS'd. And DDOS'ing is very clearly a tactic that violates the first amendment. So really by no longer serving 8chan, the only thing they are doing is allowing and/or encouraging others to violate 8chan's constitutional rights.

It reminds me a lot of Charlottesville, where people showed up to try to shout over the white nationalists and it just ended up with a bunch of people getting run over by a car. As if something like that happening wasn't entirely predictable.

If 8chan is inciting violence or doing other things not covered by the first amendment then it should be the government's job to police that.

Post reply on HN